The information provided by bard represents all of the known information at this time.Despite good faith efforts to obtain additional information, the complainant / reporter was unable or unwilling to provide any further patient, product, or procedural details to bard.The manufacturer has received the sample and will evaluate.Results are expected soon.A lot history review (lhr) of reaq1367 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|
The following were reviewed as part of this investigation: patient severity, frequency analysis, applicable previous investigation(s), sample (if available), applicable fmea documents, labeling, and applicable manufacture records.Based on a review of this information, the following was concluded: the complaint of a catheter kink was confirmed and the cause appeared to be use related.The product returned for evaluation was a 2fr perqcath catheter.The catheter was returned with what appeared to be a bd insyte iv catheter which was dressed and positioned against the perqcath strain relief.Additionally, the stylet t-lock assembly remained attached to the perqcath luer but the stylet had been pulled through the t-lock septum and was not returned.Gross visual evaluation of the catheter revealed a kink in the bd insyte iv catheter at the luer hub of that device and this iv catheter kink would have also affected the underlying perqcath catheter.Following removal of the iv catheter, no permanent kink impressions could be seen on the bard perqcath device.Since the non-bard iv catheter kink affected the bard perqcath device the complaint was confirmed and it is possible that the combination use of both an iv catheter and perqcath catheter contributed to the kinking described in the event description.The simultaneous use of both an iv catheter and bard perqcath device is considered off-label use of the device.A lot history review (lhr) of reaq1367 showed no other similar product complaint(s) from this lot number.
|